Madras High CourtWP/11442/2023dismissed as infructuous

K.Sathguru v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

2026-04-10Honourable Mr Justice Krishnan Ramasamy5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY and WMP.No.11329 of 2023 K.Sathguru ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

2. The Principal Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Reforms, Chepauk, Chennai-5.

3. The Assistant Commissioner/ Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Kunrathur.

4. The District Collector, Collectorate, Chennai-600 001.

5. The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010.

6. The Tahsildhar, Alandur, Chennai-600 016.

7. The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Buildings, Chennai-600 003.

..Respondent(s)

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ of mandamus, forbearing the respondents 4 to 7 from erecting any new constructions in the land belonging to the petitioner in S.No. 226/3, Manapakkam Village, Alandur Taluk, Chennai District. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Kamalesh Kannan For Respondent(s):

Mr.T.K.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R4 & R6 Mr.C.Selvaraj Standing Counsel for R5

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of writ of mandamus, forbearing the respondents 4 to 7 from erecting any new constructions in the land belonging to the petitioner in S.No. 226/3, Manapakkam Village, Alandur Taluk, Chennai District.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the official respondents would submit that in the present case, already construction work has been completed therefore, nothing survives for further adjudication.

3. However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks time to get instructions and perusal of the documents.

4. In the present case, the prayer in the writ petition is for a mandamus, forbearing the respondents from erecting any new construction in the subject property. However, it is stated that the construction has already been completed. Therefore, even if the petitioner is taking further instructions, no favourable orders can be passed as the construction work has already been completed and hence, the prayer in the writ petition has become infructuous.

5. In view of the same, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 10-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order KKN